kay_gee Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 there wouldn't be any hole to fill. the jets have a surplus of dlineman. also, what makes you believe that with the 18th pick, the jets solve their receiver problem. there is a 50/50 shot the player doesn't work out as planned you have a surplus of defensive lineman who aren't as good as Mo. and your logic is the Jets may or may not fulfill their WR/TE with the 18th pick, so they should trade Mo + more to maybe or maybe not fulfill their WR/TE with a higher pick? you trade everything for a franchise QB, not for a WR/TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Wilkerson isnt getting traded, but its interesting to see Jets fans value vs actual value. Wilkerson is a very good defensive linemen who has the ability to play inside and slide out. Cameron Jordan is very good at this too. Cameron Jordan is not a superstar. Retarded analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 I've actually since changed my mind to Jeremy Maclin. In any event...So, after the Jets trade Mo Wilkerson, would they be well advised to cut Mangold, move Sheldon Richardson to Center, and enter discussions to move the team to Los Angeles? LOVE your off-the-beaten-path thinking, bro! I like Jeremy Maclin!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Retarded analogy. Okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 you have a surplus of defensive lineman who aren't as good as Mo. and your logic is the Jets may or may not fulfill their WR/TE with the 18th pick, so they should trade Mo + more to maybe or maybe not fulfill their WR/TE with a higher pick? you trade everything for a franchise QB, not for a WR/TE. no. I didn't say trade mo for a te/wr.I said the jets may not solve their receiver issues with the 18th pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsfan80 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Muhammad Wilkerson plays 9 different places on this defense. 9. And he's excellent at every single one. He's totes not a superstar guys, totes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Muhammad Wilkerson plays 9 different places on this defense. 9. And he's excellent at every single one. He's totes not a superstar guys, totes. Was Leon Lett a superstar? Again, superstar vs very good is semantics anyway. Who cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 an 8-8 team doesn't do this a 2-14 team might Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kay_gee Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 no. I didn't say trade mo for a te/wr.I said the jets may not solve their receiver issues with the 18th pick. in your original post, you're not suggesting trading Mo + to either get offensice playmakers or get picks for offensive playmakers? and they don't necessarily solve their offensive woes with the 9th pick, either. nobody is giving you a high first rounder for just Mo, so you'd have to give up more than Mo. and unless you're going all out for an Andrew Luck-type QB, there's no reason for the Jets to make that trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 Muhammad Wilkerson plays 9 different places on this defense. 9. And he's excellent at every single one. He's totes not a superstar guys, totes. yes, mo wilks is the Michael Jordan of the jets. I really just asked what his trade value would be and how much the dline would suffer without him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 in your original post, you're not suggesting trading Mo + to either get offensice playmakers or get picks for offensive playmakers? and they don't necessarily solve their offensive woes with the 9th pick, either. nobody is giving you a high first rounder for just Mo, so you'd have to give up more than Mo. and unless you're going all out for an Andrew Luck-type QB, there's no reason for the Jets to make that trade. yes, I suggested trading mo for offensive playmakers.maybe even a qb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Hey, if the Colts could stop the run, they might still be playing. Mo for Andrew Luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stonehands Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 No. One of the few impact players we have. We need to clone him, not trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 No. One of the few impact players we have. We need to clone him, not trade him. We actually kinda did with Richardson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 I'm not saying trade him. I'm saying he shouldnt be untouchable if the right offer were on the other side. If someone called offering a top 5 pick I'd certainly listen, considering the depth we have at dline. Clowney is probably the only guy you'd do it for. As nice as Bridgewater looks, next year's QB draft could be epic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Clowney is probably the only guy you'd do it for. As nice as Bridgewater looks, next year's QB draft could be epic. This is merely an offseason hypothetical thread. It just got invaded by the ninnies. Wilkerson's a beast and his versatility is awesome. As is Richardson's. Coples would be the guy to trade if we had to lose one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 This is merely an offseason hypothetical thread. It just got invaded by the ninnies. Wilkerson's a beast and his versatility is awesome. As is Richardson's. Coples would be the guy to trade if we had to lose one. while I agree and I thought about him, there just wouldn't be enough compensation for him. wilks is the only one with any real trade value. I do believe that sliding coples back inside would elevate his game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 This is merely an offseason hypothetical thread. It just got invaded by the ninnies. Wilkerson's a beast and his versatility is awesome. As is Richardson's. Coples would be the guy to trade if we had to lose one. Word. I'm still interested to see if Idzik switches the DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Clowney stock had to drop with all the issue of him this season Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZachEY Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Clowney is probably the only guy you'd do it for. As nice as Bridgewater looks, next year's QB draft could be epic. High draft pick logic makes little sense. In 2008, no one would have traded the #6 overall pick for Mo Wilkerson (at present production, ability, and cost). That was Vernon Gholston. The only way I'd trade Wilkerson is for a proven commodity at QB. Or, if he were a defensive back who was headed for his 3rd hold-out, asking for 16M a year, and coming off an ACL injury. Then, maybe I'd trade him for picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbone Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Trading away our best player two years running=championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 still, no real answer to my questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurnleyJet Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 still, no real answer to my questions NO!!!!!!!! - Is your answer, we have 50 mill cap, a sh#t load of picks and we will be hitting O hard in the Draft. It's the kind of Trade even hypothetical that would come back to haunt us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Troll of the month award Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupz27 Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 the problem with the jets dline is that they are all interior guys. yes, I know they can play multiple positions, but ALL are best suited inside.all of them are pocket pushers but none are real pass rushers. I, too, am just floating the idea, nothing more. but the question is, how much do you lose on the dline without wilks as opposed to having wilks? couples would slide back to de( a much more natural position for him than outside linebacker) and douzable is the rotation guy. if the jets were an investment, they seem to have too many eggs in one basket and practically no basket at all in other positions For draft picks that net you Bridgewater, or a player at a pressing need position that is equal to, or greater than Wilkerson lets talk, but other than that I wouldn't be on board for maybe's (non Bridgewater draft picks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Clowney stock had to drop with all the issue of him this season Tommy Meh. All pass rushers and wide receivers are primadonnas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 High draft pick logic makes little sense. In 2008, no one would have traded the #6 overall pick for Mo Wilkerson (at present production, ability, and cost). That was Vernon Gholston. The only way I'd trade Wilkerson is for a proven commodity at QB. Or, if he were a defensive back who was headed for his 3rd hold-out, asking for 16M a year, and coming off an ACL injury. Then, maybe I'd trade him for picks. Mostly agree. The only reason I'm saying you listen to a Mo-for-Clowney deal is because, as good as Mo is, Clowney might be Bruce Smith Redux. You'd be taking a chance at upgrading the same position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Meh. All pass rushers and wide receivers are primadonnas. I am not going to make a risky play for a guy that has shown that he will not play hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoeword Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 All this talk of Earl Thomas reminds me of one of my favorite Jets Earlie Thomas #45. Played in the 70's - a shutdown corner before the term was used. The opposition always threw away from him because burnable guys like Rich Sowells were on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 NO!!!!!!!! - Is your answer, we have 50 mill cap, a sh#t load of picks and we will be hitting O hard in the Draft. It's the kind of Trade even hypothetical that would come back to haunt us. simple enough, but still doesn't answer the question. the trade would haunt us only if the compensation wasn't good enough. hence the question, what is his trade value worth? also, obviously the jets need offensive players. what if at pick 18 and 49 the defensive players available are better than the offensive players available? does idzik draft for need because the offense is weak or does he stick with best player available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faba Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Off the topic how much do you attribute Thomas' success to having Sherman who now is the best CB in the league in the same secondary? So much more for him not to be concerned with having a lock down corner with him. Not saying he is not good but factor that in also Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 For draft picks that net you Bridgewater, or a player at a pressing need position that is equal to, or greater than Wilkerson lets talk, but other than that I wouldn't be on board for maybe's (non Bridgewater draft picks). that's one of the reasons I asked what his trade value is worth. if he is worth a mid 1st and 2nd, coupled with the jets #18, seems like enough to get to the top end of the draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 I am not going to make a risky play for a guy that has shown that he will not play hard. Clowney is a head case for sure, and he played on a team that embraces headcases. That said, most of these guys carry the "takes plays off" label. Hell, Coples had a worse rep and we still drafted him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T0mShane Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Off the topic how much do you attribute Thomas' success to having Sherman who now is the best CB in the league in the same secondary? So much more for him not to be concerned with having a lock down corner with him. Not saying he is not good but factor that in also Carroll has always produced good safeties, but Earl Thomas was going to be great regardless. Dude is a savant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ylekram Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 Troll of the month award just in case you missed it, this is a hypothetical discussion in which I was trying to weigh out the pros and cons of such a trade out of boredom. get it. hypothetical. out of boredom. pros and cons. contribute in the discussion or get lost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.